Technology

Oct. 20 (UPI) — Florida’s attorney general announced Monday that criminal subpoenas have been issued to the online children’s gaming site Roblox as he called the platform a “breeding ground for predators.”

Attorney General James Uthmeier accused Roblox of failing to verify users’ ages and failing to moderate sexually explicit content.

“We are issuing criminal subpoenas to Roblox, which has become a breeding ground for predators to gain access to our kids,” Uthmeier announced Monday in a post on X.

“We will stop at nothing in the fight to protect Florida’s children, and companies that expose them to harm will be held accountable,” the state attorney general added.

Uthmeier said recent investigations into Roblox found sexual predators have used the in-game currency on the platform to bribe minors into sending them explicit content of themselves.

Before Monday’s criminal subpoenas, Roblox has faced lawsuits, accusing the platform of failing to implement safety measures, provide proper warnings or report incidents of child victimization.

In August, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill filed a lawsuit, which also accused Roblox of enabling online predators to endanger children after an alleged sexual predator was arrested while using the site.

“Roblox profited off of our kids while exposing them to the most dangerous of harms,” Uthmeier said. “They enable our kids to be abused.”

Uthmeier issued a subpoena against Roblox in April to get more information on how the platform moderates chat rooms and markets its site to kids.

“As a father and attorney general, children’s safety and protection are a top priority,” Uthmeier said. “There are concerning reports that this gaming platform, which is popular among children, is exposing them to harmful content and bad actors.”

Oct. 20 (UPI) — Amazon Web Services’ cloud services global outage disrupted Internet service for companies, governments, universities and individual users on Monday. It wasn’t until a half day later, the coverage was heavily restored.

By Monday afternoon on the U.S. East Coast, Amazon said the connectivity issues had been “fully mitigated,” though there were still reports of problems.

More than 1,000 companies were affected, including large tech companies, CNET reported, but there is no evidence it was caused by a cyber attack. Instead, “the root cause is an underlying internal subsystem responsible for monitoring the health of our network load balancers.”

AWS accounted for 37% of the global cloud market in 2024, according to market research firm. That represents revenue more than $107 billion for the tech company. Amazon’s total revenue was $639 revenue that year.

The services run on 3.7 million plus miles of fiber optic cables.

Downdetector, a website that aggregates user-submitted reports of disruptions, logged 6.5 million global reports related to the outage, a spokesperson for the site’s parent company Ookla told CNN.

Toms Guide showed how traffic was affected at major companies, including Verizon, Lyft, McDonald’s, Snapchat, and airl as Delta, Southwest and United airlines.

Also were the New York Times’ website, T-Mobile and AT&T were affected. Even massive tech companies, Google and Apple, were impacted. And Zoom, which gained prominance during the pandemic for people to communite, had outage issues.

Disrupted, too, were banks and cryptocurrency exchange Coinbbase and Venmo.

Amazon’s own services were disrupted. Alexa-enabled smart plugs, which allow people to control appliances and other devices remotely, didn’t have service. Amazon’s Ring doorbell cameras weren’t working. Some reported they were unable to access the company’s website or download books to their Kindles. And Netflix wasn’t available.

“The incident highlights the complexity and fragility of the internet, as well as how much every aspect of our work depends on the internet to work,” Mehdi Daoudi, CEO of internet performance monitoring firm Catchpoint said in a statement to CNN. “The financial impact of this outage will easily reach into the hundreds of billions due to loss in productivity for millions of workers that cannot do their job, plus business operations that are stopped or delayed — from airlines to factories.”

Tenscope showed that Amazon alone was losing $72.3 milion per hour, and customers lost several hundred thousand dollars each 60 minutes.

In cloud services, AW provides a space where businesses can rent the services instead of building their own servers.

“It’s like: ‘Why build the house if you’re just going to live in it?'” Lance Ulanoff, editor at the technology publication TechRadar, told CNN.

And there are problems with devices when service is disrupted.

“They just don’t work without the Internet,” Ulanoff said. ” They’re not designed that way,. We’ve designed everything to work with that constant connectivity and when you pull that big plug, everything, basically becomes dumb.”

Apparently, the problem originated from a system designed to monitor how much load is on the network. As a workaround, Amazon said it was allowing companies to create new instances of its Elastic Compute Cloud, a virtual machine that allows customers to build cloud-based applications.

At the peak of the incident, early Monday, AWS reported more than 70 of its own services were impacted.

“Some requests may be throttled while we work toward full resolution,” it said, urging customers to utilize the “clear cacheclear cache” option in the settings of their browser if problems with errors persisted.

Amazon reported at 1:26 a.m. EDT that there was a “significant error rates for requests.”

“Error 404” messaged popped up on computers.

At 3:11 a.m. EDT, Amazon “reported increased error rates for multiple services and determined that the issue was related” to the Northern Virginia region, according to a news release.

Amazon reported at 5:24 a.m. EDT, service was “fully mitigated.”

Then at 10:29 a.m., Amazon said there were application programming interface errors and connectivity issues “across multiple services in the US-EAST-1 Region.”

Around 3:30 p.m., AWS said its systems mostly were back online. “We continue to observe recovery across all AWS services,” the company said.

In Britain, Gov.uk and His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, the two main portals of the British government, said they had been affected.

“We are aware of an incident affecting Amazon Web Services, and several online services which rely on their infrastructure. Through our established incident response arrangements, we are in contact with the company, who are working to restore services as quickly as possible,” said a government spokesman.

Lloyds Bank and subsidiary, Halifax, two of the country’s largest banks, and National Rail also experienced problems.

The outage comes 15 months after a global IT outage in July 2024 that crashed millions of computers used by 911 centers, airlines, financial institutions, airlines and media around the world, due to an issue with a third-party security update for Microsoft Windows systems.

The auto download from Texas-based CrowdStrike cybersecurity for its Falcon software caused computers to hang after they were able to fully restart after the update.

For Scott Smith, the cuts to the Corporation For Public Broadcasting are existential.

He is the general manager of Allegheny Mountain Radio, which he runs alongside programme manager Heather Nidly. The funds were slashed as part of United States President Donald Trump’s vast tax cut and spending bill that was signed into law in July. As a result, the station, which has been on air for more than four decades, lost 65 percent of its funding.

“We are here to serve our communities and to fulfill our mission of giving them news, giving them entertainment, giving them emergency alerts and giving them school closings. We do lost and found pet notices. We do funeral announcements. We have a listing of community events that is read multiple times a day. We do weather forecasts. We’re a critical part of the community,” Smith told Al Jazeera.

The rescissions bill that Trump signed allows the US Congress to claw back funding that had been approved and pulls back $9bn in funding, including $1bn from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CFB). At the end of September, those funds officially dried up.

The money had already been allocated by the previous Congress to fund public media for 2026 and 2027. Now stations are scrambling to find ways to fill the holes.

The Trump administration has gone after news organisations that have presented any critical coverage of him, including the Wall Street Journal, after its coverage of a suggestive letter purportedly written by Trump to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein for his birthday. In September, he tried to sue The New York Times for allegedly being a “virtual mouthpiece” for the Democratic Party.

His leverage over public media is significant because that is partially funded by federal tax dollars. The White House first signed an executive order to defund public media in May. That was quickly blocked because funding decisions are made by Congress, not the White House.

Next, Trump pressured Congressional Republicans to put forth the rescissions bill that fulfilled the mission of his previous executive order. To justify his call for cuts, in May, the White House released a list of segments from NPR and PBS programmes that it says had liberal bias, as it included many segments about the experience of the trans community.

The White House also cited a report alleging PBS favoured Democrats. That report was from the openly partisan Media Research Center, which has a stated goal to promote conservative values.

A key, but overlooked, problem with the cuts is that they overwhelmingly harm stations that do not even cover the White House or much national politics at all.

Allegheny Mountain Radio (AMR) is one of those stations. Comprising three affiliates for three counties straddling the West Virginia and Virginia border, on their airwaves, listeners will find gospel, folk and country music, as well as coverage of local football games and town hall meetings.

AMR carries NPR’s national newscast and, more importantly, serves as the on-the-ground voice when severe weather hits.

Unlike in other regions of the county, there is no other alternative to get real-time local news. The nearest local news station is several hours away, separated by winding country roads. When there’s severe weather, AMR is the only way locals get vital information like road closure announcements because of floodwaters.

“Just a few years ago, we had a deluge of rain coming down and flooding parts of the county. At that point, when something like that happens, the radio station really is the only way to get that information out quickly to our listeners and let them know where it’s happening,” AMR programme manager Nidly told Al Jazeera.

AMR is in a part of the country where cellphone signal and wireless access are sparse because of its proximity to what is called the National Radio Quiet Zone (NRQZ) near the Green Bank Observatory, which limits the use of radio frequency and other signal methods so that they do not interfere with their equipment. This requires special equipment to point radio signals away from the observatory.

With the region’s low population density, there’s a limited business case for a station. But there is a case for public service. The community depends on AMR for emergency alerts – even on a personal level. During major storms, Smith said, people have shown up at their stations when their phones stopped working, asking if AMR could broadcast a message to let their family and friends know they were safe.

Despite their strong community focus, these stations may not benefit from the same level of donor support seen by larger public stations across the country, due to limited local enterprise and resources.

It is trying. In order to stay afloat, the station is actively soliciting donations on its website.

While small community stations – like those serving Bath and Pocahontas Counties in West Virginia, and Highland County, Virginia, through AMR – don’t produce national newscasts or air segments that ruffle feathers in Washington, they are still the ones that are most at risk of being hit hardest.

“Small stations like ours are the ones who will suffer because of these cuts. We feel like we are the baby that got thrown out with the bathwater because there’s so much emphasis on the talking points around NPR and PBS. It’s like the rest of us, the small community stations, have absolutely been forgotten in this equation,” Smith told Al Jazeera.

The cuts, however, hit stations across the US in big markets too. WNYC in New York City lost 4 percent of its funding. WBUR in Boston, San Francisco’s KLAW, and KERA in Dallas, Texas, all saw 5 percent cuts.

Stations like these have large donor bases or “listeners like you”, as their hosts say during pledge drives. Big market stations might be able to make up the difference, says Alex Curley, a former product manager at NPR who recently launched a platform called Adopt A Station, which shows which public media stations are at most risk of losing funding.

“When you think about stations that rely on federal funding for 50 percent or more of their revenue, it’s not because they’re asking for a handout. It’s a literal public service for those stations,” Curley told Al Jazeera.

But in counties where the population is sparse and industry is limited, that donor base is not as plentiful. That’s the case with AMR.

“We are in a very rural area. We are an area where there are not a whole lot of businesses. So that amount of income simply cannot be made up through extra donations or extra underwriting,” Smith added.

In a July Substack post, Curley, who was involved in NPR station finances until he left the network in 2024 amid layoffs, said that 15 percent of stations are at risk of closure. His website has provided some reprieve.

“I only expected maybe a few dozen people to visit the site. My biggest hope was to get a couple of donations that went towards a station at risk. It’s [the website] been shared thousands of times. I’ve even heard from stations that were identified as being at risk of closing. They told me they’re getting an influx of donations from out of state through the site. It’s been an incredible response,” Curley said.

However, he argues, this is a temporary fix.

“The real danger will be in six months, a year, two years, when people have forgotten about public media. These stations basically are losing federal funding forever. Donations in the short term are really great, but in the long term, they’re going to have to figure out ways to keep donors engaged and to keep donations flowing to them, or they might close,” Curley added.

“Public radio is also a lifeline, connecting rural communities to the rest of the nation, and providing life-saving emergency broadcasting and weather alerts. Nearly 3-in-4 Americans say they rely on their public radio stations for alerts and news for their public safety,” NPR’s Katherine Maher said in a statement on July 18 following the Senate vote.

“In fact, while the Senate considered amendments, a 7.3 earthquake struck off the coast of Alaska, prompting three coastal stations to start broadcasting live tsunami warnings, urging their communities to head to high ground,” Maher said.

Maher declined Al Jazeera’s request for an interview

PBS faces similar pressures, and many of its stations are also at risk of closure, according to Adopt A Station’s data.

“These cuts will significantly impact all of our stations, but will be especially devastating to smaller stations and those serving large rural areas. Many of our stations, which provide access to free, unique local programming and emergency alerts, will now be forced to make hard decisions in the weeks and months ahead,” PBS president and CEO Paula Kerger said in a statement after the Senate vote.

Kerger did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for additional comment.

The push to defund public media isn’t a new one for the GOP. Republicans have long argued that the media is not a core function of government. In 2012, GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney said he would eliminate subsidies to PBS – during a debate moderated, ironically, by then PBS NewsHour anchor Jim Lehrer.

In the 1990s, then House Speaker Newt Gingrich promised to “zero out” funding for CPB, arguing it should be privatised. And in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan attempted to slash $80m from public media – roughly $283m today – though Congress blocked the move.

Following global cuts

Cuts to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting are the latest wave of the White House cutting back on government-funded media arms, including reductions to the US Agency for Global Media, led in part by senior adviser Kari Lake.

Lake is a former Phoenix, Arizona, news anchor known for denying the 2020 election results in which Trump lost to Democrat Joe Biden for the presidency. She is also known for promoting baseless conspiracy theories and for refusing to accept her own defeat for governor and senator bids in Arizona in 2022 and 2024, respectively.

She has been behind the agency effectively shuttering Voice of America (VOA), which has not published any new stories or uploaded new videos to its YouTube page since mid-March.

Last month, a federal judge in Washington blocked the firing of workers at VOA, which affected more than 500 staffers. The Trump administration called the decision “outrageous” and vowed to appeal.

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, which broadcasts in 27 languages across 23 countries, faced challenges similar to VOA. However, the European Union has helped keep the network up and running with $6.2m in emergency funding.

Representatives for the US Agency for Global Media did not respond to our request for comment.

Looming threats to free expression

These cuts come alongside other threats to freedom of expression in the private sector. Soon after the funding cuts were signed into law, Paramount announced the cancellation of The Late Show. The host, comedian Stephen Colbert – a longtime critic of the president – had only days earlier called out Paramount, the show’s parent company, for settling a lawsuit with Trump.

The suit stemmed from Trump’s claim that an interview with his 2024 presidential rival Kamala Harris was doctored. Although the network had initially called the lawsuit meritless, it ultimately settled for $16m. Colbert called the settlement a “big fat bribe”, noting that Paramount had a then-pending merger with Skydance Media – owned by David Ellison, son of Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, a key Trump ally. The merger has since been approved. Paramount has said that the decision is purely financial in nature.

Months later, following stand-up comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s comments on Charlie Kirk’s death, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr appeared on a right-wing podcast to criticise the remarks and urged Disney – the parent company of ABC, where Jimmy Kimmel Live airs – to cancel the show.

Nexstar Media Group – one of the largest TV station operators in the US, and which is waiting on an FCC approval of its merger with Tegna – announced it would no longer carry the programme. Disney subsequently suspended the show, though the decision was short-lived, as it returned to the airwaves within a week.

The White House did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

Connectivity issues for many companies around the world disrupted as outage hits Amazon Web Services.

The electric carmaker had unveiled chief Elon Musk’s proposed $1 trillion compensation plan in September.

Tesla’s proposed $1 trillion pay package for CEO Elon Musk has come under renewed scrutiny after proxy adviser Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) urged investors to vote against what could be the largest compensation plan ever awarded to a company chief.

ISS’s comments on Friday marks the second consecutive year that it has urged shareholders to reject a compensation plan for Musk.

Proxy advisers often sway major institutional investors, including the passive funds that hold large stakes in Tesla.

The ISS recommendation adds pressure on Tesla’s board before a closely watched November 6 shareholder meeting and renews scrutiny of Musk’s compensation after a Delaware court earlier voided his $56bn pay package.

Musk’s record Tesla pay plan could still hand him tens of billions of dollars even if he falls short of most of its ambitious targets, however, thanks to a structure that rewards partial achievement and soaring share prices.

Last month, Tesla’s board proposed a $1 trillion compensation plan for Musk in what it described as the largest corporate pay package in history, setting ambitious performance targets and aiming to address his push for greater control over the company.

ISS said that while the board’s goal was to retain Musk because of his “track record and vision”, the 2025 pay package “locks in extraordinarily high pay opportunities over the next ten years” and “reduces the board’s ability to meaningfully adjust future pay levels.”

Tesla’s shares rose after the compensation plan was unveiled last month, as investors believe the pay package would incentivise Musk to focus on the company’s strategy.

“Many people come to Tesla to specifically work with Elon, so we recognise that retaining and incentivising him will, in the long run, help us retain and recruit better talent,” Director Kathleen Wilson-Thompson said in a video posted to Tesla’s X handle on Friday.

Unlike the 2018 pay deal, Musk will be allowed to vote using his shares this time, giving him about 13.5 percent of Tesla’s voting power, according to a securities filing last month. That stake alone could be enough to secure approval.

The proxy adviser cited the “astronomical” size of the proposed grant, design features that could deliver very high payouts for partial goal achievement and potential dilution for existing investors.

Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Reuters news agency.

ISS valued the stock-based award at $104bn, higher than Tesla’s own estimate of $87.8bn.

The grant would vest only if Tesla reaches market capitalisation milestones up to $8.5 trillion and operational targets, including delivery of 20 million vehicles, one million robotaxis and $400bn in adjusted core earnings.

The proxy adviser’s guidance on Musk’s pay was part of a wider set of voting recommendations issued on Friday.

As of 3:45pm in New York (19:45 GMT), Tesla’s stock was up 2.4 percent.

Oct. 17 (UPI) — More than 20 states are suing the Trump administration for rescinding $7 billion in Congress-approved funds to equip nearly 1 million homes in low-income and disadvantaged communities with solar power.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, accuses the Environmental Protection Agency of breaching grant agreements by unilaterally terminated grants that had already been awarded.

“The administration is again targeting people struggling to get by in America, this time by gutting programs that help low-income households afford electricity, Washington State Attorney General Nick Brown said in a statement.

“Congress passed a solar energy program to help make electricity costs more affordable, but the administration is ignoring the law and focused on the conspiracy theory that climate change is a hoax.

The Solar for All program was established with the passage of the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, which included a $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for the EPA to administer.

Using that Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, Congress appropriated $7 billion for the EPA to make grants, loans and financial assistance available for low-income and disadvantaged communities to benefit from zero-emission technologies, including solar power.

In April 2024, the EPA announced it had selected 60 applicants to receive the grants. By August of that year, the EPA had awarded program funds to states and other grant recipients.

But in August, the EPA, under the Trump administration, ended the program and reclaimed about 90% of the funds already awarded.

The 22 states, along with the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation, are accusing the Trump administration of violating the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how administrative agencies operate, and the Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine by canceling the program.

The plaintiffs allege that the EPA is using an “erroneous interpretation” of H.R. 1, which the Trump administration calls the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, passed by Congress in July, to justify the termination of the grants.

The states on Wednesday also filed a complaint in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims to recover damages caused by the alleged breach of the grant agreements.

Earlier this month, a coalition of solar energy companies, labor unions and homeowners sued the EPA over the termination of the grants.

Oct. 16 (UPI) — U.S.-based driverless taxi pioneer Waymo tested its new Jaguar-brand taxis in the Bronx on Thursday and plans to deploy them in London during the upcoming year.

London would become the first European city to OK autonomous taxi services, which already are available in the U.S. cities of San Francisco, Austin, Atlanta, Los Angeles and Phoenix, according to AutoTrade.ie.

Mountain View, Calif.-headquartered Waymo is partnering with Amsterdam-based Moove to expand its autonomous taxi service to London in the spring.

Moove officials are negotiating related licensing and other matters with London officials and would serve as Waymo’s fleet operations partner, engadget reported.

Moove already operates a mobility business in London and has the experience and knowledge needed to enable Waymo to successfully expand its services to England’s capital city.

“We’re excited by a future where Waymo’s safe and reliable autonomous technology is available in London,” Ladi Delano, Moove co-chief executive officer, said Wednesday in a news release.

“This partnership represents a major step forward for urban mobility, bringing world-class innovation to one of the world’s greatest cities,” Delano added.

Waymo has partnered with Bronx Community College and The City College of New York’s University Transportation Research Center to develop and improve a training curriculum for autonomous vehicles.

“This AV training curriculum bridges cutting-edge technology with practical workforce development [while] addressing real-world challenges in our communities,” UTRC Director Camille Kamga said.

Waymo Vice President of Engineering Satish Jeyachandran said the partnership with Bronx Community College and the UTRC will prepare students for new career opportunities in the growing autonomous vehicle industry.

The partnership also enables the development and deployment of safety-oriented autonomous vehicles in NewYork City and elsewhere, New York State Assemblywoman Yudelka Tapia said.

“Retraining for-hire and taxi drivers and welcoming new talent into the workforce will ensure a smooth transition that creates new career opportunities,” Tapia added.

The collaborative program will be housed at the community college’s Patterson Garage, where a $9 million upgrade recently was completed with funding from the New York governor’s office.

The proposal, which forms part of the ‘European Drone Defence Initiative’, is one of several flagship EU projects to prepare the bloc for a potential attack from Moscow.

The European Commission is in discussions to adopt a new counter-drone initiative to protect European Union airspace from Russian violations, as it seeks to strengthen border security with its own advanced drone technology after a string of drone incursions were reported in a host of EU and NATO member countries over the past month.

The proposal, which was included in a defence policy “roadmap” presented on Thursday, will aim for the new anti-drone capabilities to reach initial capacity by the end of next year and become fully operational by the end of 2027, according to a draft of the document.

It will then be presented to EU foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas, European Commission Executive Vice President for Security Henna Virkkunen, and European Commissioner for Defence Andrius Kubilius.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said last month that it was time for Europe to build a “drone wall” to protect its eastern flank, hours after some 20 Russian drones reportedly entered the airspace of EU and NATO member Poland.

The concept has since morphed into a broader “European Drone Defence Initiative” including a continent-wide web of anti-drone systems in an effort to win support from EU capitals.

The drone initiative is one of several flagship EU projects aiming to prepare the bloc for a potential attack from Russia as its more than three-year-long war in Ukraine grinds on.

In the meantime, as a counterpoint, Russia’s federal security chief said on Thursday that Moscow has no doubt about NATO’s security services’ involvement in incidents with alleged Russian drones over EU territory, Russian news agency RIA Novosti cited him as saying.

Following the drone incursion into Poland, other incidents were reported at airports and military installations in several other countries further west, including Denmark, Estonia and Germany, although there has not been confirmation that the drones were sent by the Kremlin.

For its part, NATO has launched a new mission and beefed up forces on its eastern border, but it is playing catch-up as it tries to tap Ukraine’s experience and get to grips with the drone threat from Moscow.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said on Wednesday that NATO was now “testing integrated systems that will help us detect, track and neutralise aerial threats” for use on the bloc’s eastern flank.

Ukrainian officials say Russia’s incursions into other countries’ airspace are deliberate.

“Putin just keeps escalating, expanding his war, and testing the West,” Andrii Sybiha, Ukraine’s foreign minister, said last month after the drones were spotted in Poland.

Other NATO allies have also claimed the incursions were deliberate.

However, experts in drone warfare say it is still possible that the incursions were not deliberate.

Russia has denied deliberately attacking any of the European countries, instead accusing them of making false allegations to cause tensions.

While Brussels wants to have the drone project fully up and running by the end of 2027, there is scepticism from some EU countries and fears that the bloc is treading on NATO’s toes.

“We are not doubling the work that NATO is doing; actually, we are complementing each other,” said Kallas.

YouTube users reported problems streaming content and accessing the app for about 60 minutes before the company resolved the issue.

YouTube says it has resolved problems with its website and app after hundreds of thousands of users worldwide self-reported issues with its streaming services.

“This issue has been fixed – you should now be able to play videos on YouTube, YouTube Music, and YouTube TV!” YouTube wrote on X on Thursday morning in Asia.

YouTube did not disclose why users reported problems streaming videos for about 60 minutes on Thursday morning, or the global extent of the problem.

Disruptions began just before 7am in East Asia (23:00 GMT, Wednesday) for YouTube, YouTube Music and YouTube TV, according to Downdetector, a website that aggregates website disruptions in real time.

Users from Asia to Europe and North America soon reported problems streaming, accessing the website, and using the apps of YouTube and its affiliates, though error reports were most heavily concentrated in the US, according to Downdetector’s user-generated error map.

Major disruptions were also reported in Japan, Brazil and the United Kingdom, although the extent of the problem is unknown because Downdetector data is based on user-submitted reports and social media.

The number of error reports peaked at 393,038 reports in the US at 7:57am (23:57 GMT) before falling off sharply, according to Downdetector data.

Downdetector reported a smaller number of disruptions for YouTube Music and YouTube TV, which both peaked at fewer than 5,000 error reports in the US over the same period of time.

Oct. 15 (UPI) — Half of adults in the United States are more concerned than excited about the rise of artificial intelligence, at the top of the worries list of those surveyed in 25 countries by Pew Research.

The study, which was released Wednesday, didn’t include respondents from the following nations with populations of at least 100 million: China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Russia, Ethiopia, Egypt, Philippines, Congo and Vietnam.

Globally, 34% expressed concern about AI with 42% equally in both extremes and 16% more excited.

Joining the United States at 50% are those in Italy, followed by Australia at 49%, Brazil at 48%, Greece at 47%, and Canada at 45%.

At the other end, South Korea is the least concerned at 16%, followed by India at 19%, Israel at 21%, Nigeria at 24%, Turkey at 26%, Japan at 28% and Germany at 29%.

The other nations ranged in the 30s, including Britain, Argentina and Spain at 39% and France at 35%.

In none of the countries, no more than 3-in-10 adults say they are mainly excited.

In the United States, the survey was conducted among 3,605 adults from March 24 to 30 and 5,023 adults from June 9 to 15 online or by phone with a live interviewer. They are all members of the Center’s American Trends Panel.

For non-U.S. adults, surveys were done over the phone, face-to-face or online, depending on the country, among 28,333 from Jan. 8 to April 26.

A median of 34% of adults worldwide have heard or read a lot about AI, while 47% have heard a little and 14% say they’ve heard nothing at all.

There was a correlation between the country’s domestic product per capita and AI awareness.

In the comparatively wealthy countries of Japan, Germany, France and the United States, around half have heard a lot about AI, but only 14% in India and 12% in Kenya.

Younger adults are more aware and excited about AI than the older respondents.

For example, 46% of Israeli adults under 35 are more excited than concerned about its increased use in daily life, compared with 15% of those ages 50 and older.

In more than half of the countries surveyed, men are more likely than women to have heard a lot about AI.

People who frequently use the Internet are more likely than others to be mainly excited about the growing use of AI .

Geographically, 53% of adults trust the European Union to regulate AI, while 37% trust the U.S. and 27% trust China. In the EU, the survey found those in France, Greece, Italy and Poland the least trusting.

New laws signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom aim to make the artificial intelligence and social media landscape in California safer, especially for minors.

Senate Bill 243, sponsored by state Sen. Steve Padilla (D-Chula Vista) will require AI companies to incorporate guardrails that prevent so-called “companion” chatbots from talking to users of any age about suicide or self-harm. It also requires that all AI systems alert minors using the chatbots that they are not human every three hours. The systems also are barred from promoting any sexually explicit conduct to users who are minors.

The law, to be enacted on Jan. 1, follows several lawsuits filed against developers in which families allege their children committed suicide after being influenced by an AI chatbot companion.

In the same vein, Newsom signed Assembly Bill 316, which removes a civil legal defense that some AI developers have been using to make the case that they are not responsible for any harm caused by their products. They have argued that their AI products act autonomously — and so there is no legal case to blame the developers.

In a bill analysis meant for legislators, Assemblymember Maggy Krell (D-Sacramento) wrote that this change will force developers to vet their product better and ensure that they can be held to account if their product does cause harm to its users.

Another bill, AB 621, increases civil penalties for AI developers who knowingly create nonconsensual “deepfake” AI pornography. The maximum penalties go from $30,000 to $50,000, and from $150,000 to $250,000 in cases where the courts determine that the actions were done with malice.

The author of the bill, Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D-Orinda), has pointed out how this technology has been used to harm minors. “In one recent instance,” she noted in an analysis supporting the proposed legislation, “five students were expelled from a Beverly Hills Middle School after creating and sharing AI generated nude photos of their classmates.”

Another AI bill, Sen. Scott Wiener’s (D-San Francisco) SB 53, was signed into law by Newsom in late September. It will require large AI companies to publicly disclose certain safety and security protocols and report to the state on critical safety incidents. It also creates a public AI computing cluster — CalCompute — that will provide resources to startups and researchers developing large AI systems.

Bauer-Kahan also was the author of AB 56, which will require social media companies to place a warning label on their platforms for minors starting in 2027. The warning label must tell children and teens that social media is associated with mental health issues and may not be safe.

“People across the nation — including myself — have become increasingly concerned with Big Tech’s failure to protect children who interact with its products. Today, California makes clear that we will not sit and wait for companies to decide to prioritize children’s well-being over their profits,” Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, who sponsored the bill, said in a news release. “By adding warning labels to social media platforms, AB 56 gives California a new tool to protect our children.”

Other bills recently approved by Newsom look to challenge the Internet’s grip on young people and their mental health.

AB 1043, for example, will require app stores and device manufacturers to take age data from users in order to ensure that they are complying with age verification requirements. Many tech companies, including Google and Meta, approved of the bill, which was written by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland).

AB 772 will require grade K-12 schools in the state to develop a policy by mid-2027 on handling bullying and cyberbullying that happens off campus. “After-school bullying follows the pupil back to school and into the classroom, creating a hostile environment at school,” author and Assembly Speaker Pro Tem Josh Lowenthal (D-Long Beach) wrote in a bill analysis.

Proponents at the Los Angeles County Office of Education wrote in an earlier analysis that because students these days are constantly connected to the internet, bullying does not stop when school lets out. In addition, social media and texting can broadcast instances of bullying to larger audiences than ever before, according to the analysis.

The California School Boards Assn. opposed AB 772, saying that it wasn’t appropriate for school officials to take responsibility for student actions outside of school. Newsom signed the bill last weekend and included it in a larger package of bills meant to protect children from the effects of social media.

“Emerging technology like chatbots and social media can inspire, educate, and connect — but without real guardrails, technology can also exploit, mislead and endanger our kids. We’ve seen some truly horrific and tragic examples of young people harmed by unregulated tech, and we won’t stand by while companies continue without necessary limits and accountability,” Newsom said in a news release Monday. “We can continue to lead in AI and technology, but we must do it responsibly — protecting our children every step of the way. Our children’s safety is not for sale.”

Oct. 14 (UPI) — Google announced it will invest $15 billion to build an AI hub in India, Google Cloud CEO Thomas Kurian announced Tuesday.

The hub will be in Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, in southeastern India, and will reportedly be a 1-gigawatt facility.

The investment is Google’s largest Indian investment to date and will create Google’s largest AI hub in the world outside of the United States, Kurian said.

On Monday, Lokesh Nara, Andhra Pradesh’s minister of Human Resources, posted on X about the investment.

“After a year of intense discussions and relentless effort, tomorrow we make history. Google will sign an MOU with the Govt. of Andhra Pradesh for a 1GW project with an investment of $10 billion USD. It is a massive leap for our state’s digital future, innovation, and global standing. This is just the beginning,” he wrote.

The Indian Economic Times reported on Saturday that the investment would come from Google’s Indian subsidiary Raiden Infotech, which will also develop three campuses in Visakhapatnam.

According to an analysis commissioned by Google by Access Partnership, the AI hub is expected to generate at least $15 billion over five years in American gross domestic product because of new economic activity from increased cloud and AI adoption, as well as the American talent and resources involved in developing and operating the AI hub, the Google press release said.

“The Google AI hub in Visakhapatnam represents a landmark investment in India’s digital future,” Kurian said in a statement. “By delivering industry-leading AI infrastructure at scale, we are enabling businesses to innovate faster and creating meaningful opportunities for inclusive growth. This partnership reflects our shared commitment to the Indian and U.S. governments to harness AI responsibly and drive transformative impact for society.”

Part of the investment will be the construction of a new international subsea gateway, including multiple international subsea cables to land in Visakhapatnam, which is on the coast of the Bay of Bengal. This will help India meet its increasing digital demands, giving route diversity to complement subsea cable landings in Mumbai and Chennai and securing India’s digital backbone.

“This significant investment in Andhra Pradesh marks a new chapter in India’s digital transformation journey,” said N. Chandrababu Naidu, chief minister of Andhra Pradesh, in a statement. “We are proud to host India’s first truly gigawatt-scale data center and Google’s first AI hub in India, which is a testament to our shared commitment to innovation, AI adoption, and long-term support for businesses and startups in the state.”

Al Jazeera’s Nils Alder has been seeing how Lithuania’s military forces are staying ready, at a time of increasing concern over Russia’s military activity.

Oct. 14 (UPI) — China on Tuesday blacklisted five U.S. subsidiaries of South Korean shipmaker Hanwha Ocean, escalating the trade row between Beijing and Washington.

The countermeasures prohibit Chinese entities and individuals from engaging in business with Hanwha Ocean America in Houston, Texas; Hanwha Ocean USA in San Diego, Calif.; Hanwha Ocean Defense Systems in Norfolk, Va.; Hanwha Ocean Marine Engineering in New York City, N.Y.; and Hanwha Ocean Procurement Services in Bridgeport, Conn.

Beijing’s Commerce Ministry said the companies were blacklisted to counter actions the United States has taken against China targeting its maritime, logistics and shipbuilding sectors.

“These subsidiaries have assisted and supported relevant U.S. government investigations and actions, thereby endangering China’s sovereignty, security and development interests,” the ministry said in a statement.

China’s Ministry of Transport is also charging U.S.-linked vessels special port fees.

The countermeasures were announced as the first phase of fees the United States is leveling against China’s ship industry is to go into effect following findings of an April 2024 investigation launched by the U.S. Trade Representative under the previous Biden administration into China’s alleged unfair practices in the maritime, logistics and shipbuilding sectors.

The investigation was launched at the behest of five national labor unions accusing China of employing non-market policies far more aggressive and interventionist than employed by any other country in an effort to dominate the global shipbuilding, maritime and logistics sectors.

As remedy, the U.S. Trade Representative in March proposed services fees and port-entry fees against Chinese-origin ships, effective Tuesday.

A spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Commerce alleged to reporters Tuesday that the United States’ action “severely violates” World Trade Organization rules and “breaches the principle of equality and mutual benefit” of a 1980 agreement between Beijing and Washington concerning maritime transport cooperation.

“China has repeatedly express its strong dissatisfaction and firm opposition,” the spokesperson said, while accusing the United States of being unwilling to cooperate with Beijing on the matter.

“China’s countermeasures are necessary acts of passive defense and are aimed at maintaining the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese industries and enterprises, as well as the level playing-field of the international shipping and shipbuilding markets,” the spokesperson said.

“It is hoped the U.S. will face up to its mistake, move with China in the same direction and return to the right track of dialogue and consultation.”

U.S.-China trade relations, which deteriorated sharply during Trump’s first term, have further strained under his current administration, which has repeatedly imposed tariffs on Chinese goods that are being challenged in U.S. courts and at the World Trade Organization.

The two countries have been in a trade squabble since last week when Beijing’s Commerce Ministry announced tightened export restrictions on rare earth items and materials. In response, Trump announced a 100% tariff threat on his Truth Social media platform. China, whose imports are currently subject to a 30% tariff, responded by threatening to retaliate.

The back and forth comes after representatives from Washington and Beijing held trade talks in Beijing last month with prospects of further negotiations continuing this month in South Korea.

However, whether those discussions will take place on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Gyeongju remains unclear.

China has accused the United States of “double standards” after US President Donald Trump threatened to impose an additional 100 percent tariff on Chinese goods in response to Beijing’s curbs on exports of rare earth minerals.

China says its export control measures announced last week were in response to the US restrictions on its entities and targeting of Beijing’s maritime, logistics and shipbuilding industries.

Trump’s tariff threats, which come weeks ahead of the likely meeting between the US president and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, have the potential to reignite a trade war months after Washington lowered the China tariffs from 125 to 30 percent.

The actions by the world’s two largest economies threaten to ignite a new trade war, adding further uncertainty to global trade. So what’s the recent history of US trade measures against China, and will the two countries be able to resolve their differences?

Why did China tighten export controls on rare earths?

On October 9, China expanded export controls to cover 12 out of 17 rare-earth metals and certain refining equipment, effective December 1, after accusing Washington of harming China’s interests and undermining “the atmosphere of bilateral economic and trade talks”.

China also placed restrictions on the export of specialist technological equipment used to refine rare-earth metals on Thursday.

Beijing justified its measures, accusing Washington of imposing a series of trade curbs on Chinese entities despite the two sides being engaged in trade talks, with the last one taking place in Madrid, Spain last month.

Foreign companies now need Beijing’s approval to export products containing Chinese rare earths, and must disclose their intended use. China said the heightened restrictions come as a result of national security interests.

China has a near monopoly over rare earths, critical for the manufacture of technology such as electric cars, smartphones, semiconductors and weapons.

The US is a major consumer of Chinese rare earths, which are crucial for the US defence industry.

At the end of this month, Trump and Xi are expected to meet in South Korea, and experts speculate that Beijing’s move was to gain bargaining advantage in trade negotiations with Washington.

China’s tightening of restrictions on rare earths is “pre-meeting choreography” before Trump’s meeting with Xi, Kristin Vekasi, the Mansfield chair of Japan and Indo-Pacific Affairs at the University of Montana, told Al Jazeera.

How did Trump respond?

On October 10, Trump announced the imposition of a 100 percent tariff on China, effective from November 1.

“Based on the fact that China has taken this unprecedented position … the United States of America will impose a Tariff of 100 percent on China, over and above any Tariff that they are currently paying,” Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform.

He added that this would come into effect on November 1 or before that. Trump added that the US would also impose export controls on “any and all critical software”.

Earlier on October 10, Trump accused China of “trade hostility” and even said he might scrap his meeting with Xi. It is unclear at this point whether the meeting will take place.

“What the United States has is we have a lot of leverage, and my hope, and I know the president’s hope, is that we don’t have to use that leverage,” US Vice President JD Vance told Fox News on Sunday.

How did China respond to that?

China deemed the US retaliation a “double standard”, according to remarks by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesperson on Sunday.

China said that Washington had “overstretched the concept of national security, abused export control measures” and “adopted discriminatory practices against China”.

“We are living in an era of deeper intertwining of security and economic policies. Both the US and China have expanded their conceptions of national security, encompassing a range of economic activities,” Manoj Kewalramani, chairperson of the Indo-Pacific Studies Programme at the Takshashila Institution in Bangalore, India, told Al Jazeera.

“Both have also weaponised economic interdependence with each other and third parties. There are, in other words, no saints in this game.”

Kewalramani said that China started expanding the idea of “national security” much earlier than others, especially with its “comprehensive national security concept” introduced in 2014.

Through this, China began to include many different areas, such as economics, technology, and society, under the term “national security”. This shows that China was ahead of other countries in broadening what counts as a national security issue.

China threatened additional measures if Trump went ahead with his pledge.

“Willful threats of high tariffs are not the right way to get along with China. China’s position on the trade war is consistent: we do not want it, but we are not afraid of it,” the Chinese Commerce Ministry spokesperson said in a statement.

“Should the US persist in its course, China will resolutely take corresponding measures to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests,” the statement said.

What trade measures has the US taken against China in recent history?

2025: Trump unleashes tariff war

A month after taking office for his second term, Trump signed an executive order imposing a 10 percent tariff on all imports from China, citing a trade deficit in favour of China. In this order, he also imposed tariffs on Mexico and Canada. China levied countermeasures, imposing duties on US products in retaliation.

In March, the US president doubled the tariff on all Chinese products to 20 percent as of March 4. China imposed a 15 percent tariff on a range of US farm exports in retaliation; these took effect on March 10.

Trump announced his “reciprocal tariffs,” imposing a 34 percent tariff on Chinese products. China retaliated, also announcing a 34 percent tariff on US products. This was the first time China announced export controls on rare earths.

Hours after the reciprocal tariffs went into effect, Trump paused them for all his tariff targets except China. The US and China continued to hike tit-for-tat levies on each other.

Trump slapped 145 percent tariffs on Chinese imports, prompting China to hit back with 125 percent tariffs. Washington and Beijing later cut tariffs to 30 percent and 10 percent, respectively, in May, then agreed to a 90-day truce in August for trade talks. The truce has been extended twice.

December 2024: The microchip controls are tightened

In December 2024, Trump’s predecessor, former US President Joe Biden, tightened controls on the sale of microchips first introduced on October 2022.

Under the new controls, 140 companies from China, Japan, South Korea and Singapore were added to a list of restricted entities. The US also banned more advanced chip-making equipment to certain countries. Even products manufactured abroad with US technology were restricted.

April 2024: Biden signs the TikTok ban

Biden signed a bill into law that would ban TikTok unless it was sold to a non-Chinese buyer within a year. The US government alleged that TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance was linked to the Chinese government, making the app a threat to national security.

ByteDance sued the US federal government over this bill in May 2024.

In September this year, Trump announced that a deal was finalised to find a new owner of TikTok.

October 2023: Biden introduces more restrictions on chips

In October 2023, Biden restricted US exports of advanced computer chips, especially those made by Nvidia, to China and other countries.

The goal of this measure was to limit China’s access to “advanced semiconductors that could fuel breakthroughs in artificial intelligence and sophisticated computers that are critical to [Chinese] military applications,” Gina Raimondo, who was secretary of the US Department of Commerce during the Biden administration, told reporters.

Prior to this, Biden signed an executive order in August 2023, creating a programme that limits US investments in certain high-tech areas, including semiconductors, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence, in countries deemed to be a security risk, like China.

October 2022: Biden restricts Chinese access to semiconductors

Biden restricted China’s access to US semiconductors in October 2022. The rules further expanded restrictions on chipmaking tools to include industries that support the semiconductor supply chain, blocking both access to American expertise and the essential components used in manufacturing the tools that produce microchips.

Semiconductors are used in the manufacturing of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. The US government placed these restrictions back then to limit China’s ability to acquire the ability to produce semiconductors and advance in the technological race.

The restrictions made it compulsory for entities within China to apply for licences to acquire American semiconductors. Analysis by the US-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace described these licences as “hard to get” back then.

Recently, some US lawmakers are calling for even more restrictions, warning that China could quickly reverse-engineer advanced semiconductor technologies on its own, outpace the US in the sector, and gain a military edge.

May 2020: Trump cracks down on Huawei

In May 2020, the US Bureau of Industry and Security intensified rules to stop Huawei, the Chinese tech giant, from using American technology and software to design and make semiconductors in other countries.

The new rules said that semiconductors are designed for Huawei using US technology or equipment, anywhere in the world, would need US government approval before being sent to Huawei.

May 2019: Trump bans Huawei

Trump signed an executive order blocking Chinese telecommunications companies like Huawei from selling equipment in the US. The Shenzhen-based Huawei is the world’s largest provider of 5G networks, according to analysis by the New York City-based think tank the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Under this order, Huawei and 114 related entities were added to a list that requires US companies to get special permission (a licence) before selling certain technologies to them.

The rationale behind this order was the allegation that Huawei threatened US national security, had stolen intellectual property and could commit cyber espionage. Some US lawmakers alleged that the Chinese government was using Huawei to spy on Americans. The US did not publicise any evidence to back these allegations.

Other Western countries had also cooperated with the US.

March 2018: Trump imposes tariffs on China

During his first administration, Trump imposed sweeping 25 percent tariffs on Chinese goods worth as much as $60bn. In June of 2018, Trump announced more tariffs.

China retaliated by imposing tariffs on US products. Beijing deemed Trump’s trade policies “trade bullyism practices”, according to an official white paper, as reported by Xinhua news agency.

In September 2018, Trump issued another round of 10 percent tariffs on Chinese products, which were hiked to 25 percent in May 2019.

During the Obama administration (2009-2017)

In 2011, during US President Barack Obama’s tenure, the US-China trade deficit reached an all-time high of $295.5bn, up from $273.1bn in the previous year.

In March 2012, the US, European Union, and Japan formally complained to China at the World Trade Organization (WTO) about China’s limits on selling rare earth metals to other countries. This move was deemed “rash and unfair” by China.

In its ruling, the world trade body said China’s export restraints were breaching the WTO rules.

In 2014, the US indicted five Chinese nationals with alleged ties to China’s People’s Liberation Army. They were charged with stealing trade technology from American companies.

What’s next for the US-China trade war?

Trump and Xi are expected to meet in South Korea on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), which is set to begin on October 31.

But the latest trade dispute has clouded the Xi-Trump meeting.

On Sunday, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, downplaying the threat: “Don’t worry about China, it will all be fine! Highly respected President Xi just had a bad moment. He doesn’t want Depression for his country, and neither do I. The U.S.A. wants to help China, not hurt it!!!”

In an interview with Fox Business Network on Monday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said, “President Trump said that the tariffs would not go into effect until November 1. He will be meeting with [Communist] Party Chair Xi in [South] Korea. I believe that meeting will still be on.”

When it comes to which of the two players is more affected by the trade war, Kewalramani said that he thinks “what matters is who is willing to bear greater pain, endure greater cost”.

“This is the crucial question. I would wager that Beijing is probably better placed because Washington has alienated allies and partners with its policies since January. But then, China’s growing export controls are not simply aimed at the US. They impact every country. So Beijing has not also endeared itself to anyone,” Kewalramani said, pointing out how Trump’s tariffs and China’s rare earth restrictions target multiple countries.

“The ones affected the most are countries caught in the midst of great power competition.”

On Sunday, US VP Vance told Fox News about China: “If they respond in a highly aggressive manner, I guarantee you, the president of the United States has far more cards than the People’s Republic of China.”

Kewalramani said that so far, Beijing has been more organised, prepared and strategic than the US in its policies.

“That said, it has overreached with the latest round of export controls. US policy, meanwhile, has lacked strategic coherence. The US still is the dominant global power and has several cards to play. What matters, however, is whether it can get its house in order.”

Artificial intelligence (AI) stocks may have gotten most of the attention from investors over the last few years, but some of the period’s top-performing stocks don’t hail from the AI space — at least, not directly.

Instead, they represent emerging technologies like quantum computing, electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft, small modular nuclear reactors, and rockets and satellites. The artificial intelligence boom has provided a halo effect to other emerging technologies, as growth investors have become particularly keen to find those that might power the next breakout trend. Investing early in the company that may launch the next ChatGPT would produce huge returns, the thinking seems to go.

Thanks to the speculative optimism about their potential, many of these tech stocks have delivered returns of more than 1,000%, outperforming even Nvidia. However, few hot growth stocks have beaten AST SpaceMobile (ASTS -5.49%), which is building a satellite-based broadband network.

While it has yet to generate meaningful revenue, excitement around the business and its potential have surged recently as it has forged new agreements with customers. 

ASTS data by YCharts.

Over just the last 18 months, a $1,000 investment in AST SpaceMobile would have grown into a stake worth more than $35,000. But with that climb behind it, is it too late to buy the stock? 

What is AST SpaceMobile?

AST SpaceMobile is sometimes lumped together with other space and rocket companies like Rocket Lab, Planet Labs, and SpaceX and its Starlink subsidiary, but the company says its technology can be used with existing unmodified smartphones and operates within the low- and mid-band spectrum used by mobile network operators. That contrasts with existing space-based telecom services that are intended for low-data-rate applications, such as emergency service.

The company is building the first global cellular broadband network to connect with everyday smartphones. It intends for the technology to be used for commercial and government purposes, and is designed to reach places that are not covered by terrestrial cell towers.

It is deploying a constellation of low-Earth-orbit satellites and partnering with other telecoms to provide service to users. Founded in 2017, AST SpaceMobile launched its first test satellite in 2019 and now has a total of six satellites in orbit. It aims to have 45 to 60 satellites in orbit by 2026, serving the U.S., Europe, Japan, and other markets.

AST SpaceMobile has signed partnership deals with several global telecom companies, including AT&T, Vodafone, and Rakuten, and the stock just jumped on news that it had its expanded partnership with Verizon, adding to an earlier $100 million commitment from the telecom giant. According to the new agreement, Verizon will integrate AST SpaceMobile’s satellite network with Verizon’s 850 MHz spectrum across the country, allowing Verizon’s service to reach remote areas it doesn’t currently cover.

Image source: AST SpaceMobile.

Is AST SpaceMobile a buy?

The company expects to start booking meaningful revenues in the second half of the year. Management forecasts $50 million to $75 million in sales in the second half of 2025 as it deploys intermittent service in the U.S. That will soon be followed by service coming online in other markets like the U.K., Japan, and Canada.

Management hasn’t given a forecast for 2026, but investors expect its financial momentum to continue to build as new satellites go into service. The Wall Street consensus now predicts $254.9 million in revenue in 2026.

The company’s momentum, partnerships, and satellite deployments all sound promising, but much of its expected future success is already baked into the stock price.

AST SpaceMobile’s market cap has already soared to $31 billion, a huge number for a company that has yet to generate significant revenues. Notably, it also competes in an industry — internet connectivity — with notoriously low valuations. Verizon has a market cap of $172 billion, even though it generated nearly $20 billion in profits over its last four quarters. Internet service providers carry similarly underwhelming valuations. For example, broadband and cable service provider Charter Communications has a market cap of $36 billion, and it brought in $5 billion in net income over the last year.

The size of AST SpaceMobile’s total addressable market isn’t fully clear, though management says the global wireless services market produces over $1.1 trillion in annual revenue.

AST SpaceMobile is competing globally, which differentiates it from domestic services like Verizon. However, as it’s currently structured, the satellite company essentially aims to be a subcontractor for larger telecoms, and the telecom industry is decidedly unexciting, according to investors. As long as it’s beholden to that low-valuation ecosystem, it’s difficult to picture how the company could deliver the kind of blockbuster returns that investors seem to expect, especially considering that telecom is a mature industry.

At $31 billion, AST SpaceMobile’s market cap seems to have gotten well ahead of the reality of the business, especially as commercialization could present unforeseen challenges. In the near term, the stock could move higher if it signs more partnerships or announces other promising news, but given the sky-high valuation, the stock now looks overheated.

With AST SpaceMobile, investors are playing with fire at this point. Eventually, they’ll get burned.

Oct. 13 (UPI) — China vowed to retaliate if U.S. President Donald Trump makes good on his threat to impose a 100% tariff on goods from the Asian country, further straining fraught trade relations between the world’s largest economies.

“If the U.S. insists on going the wrong way, China will surely take resolute measures to protect its legitimate rights and interests,” a spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Commerce said Sunday in a statement.

The back and forth comes after representatives from Washington and Beijing held trade talks in Beijing last month with prospects of further negotiations continuing this month in South Korea.

However, whether those discussions will continue on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Gyeongju remains unclear.

U.S.-China trade relations have deteriorated under the Trump administration, which has repeatedly imposed tariffs on Chinese goods that are being challenged in U.S. courts are at the World Trade Organization.

Late last week, Beijing’s Commerce Ministry announced tighten export restrictions on rare earth items and materials. In response, Trump announced the 100% tariff threat on his Truth Social media platform. China imports are currently subject to a 30% tariff.

The American leader said the import tax would go into effect Nov. 1, along with additional export controls on so-called critical software.

“It is impossible to believe that China would take such an action, but they have, and the rest is History,” Trump said in the statement.

China’s commerce ministry on Sunday accused the United States of hypocrisy, saying Washington in the 20 days since their talks in Madrid has “introduced a string of new restrictive measures,” pointing to Washington putting multiple Chinese firms on the Entity List, expanded the scope of export controls affecting thousands of Chinese companies and other actions.

“The U.S. actions have severely harmed China’s interests and undermined the atmosphere of bilateral economic and trade talks, and China is resolutely opposed to them,” the ministry spokesperson said.

“China’s stance is consistent. We do not want a tariff war but we are not afraid of one.”

This decisive decade demands unprecedented action to address humanity’s greatest challenge. With global access, this three-part series examines the real consequences of climate change for our civilisation, through the rest of the 21st century and beyond.

Irish journalist Philip Boucher-Hayes visits climate hotspots, from Greenland’s melting glaciers to sub-Saharan Africa’s weather extremes, from the flooding of agricultural land in Bangladesh to the thaw of the Siberian permafrost. He meets experts and witnesses who explain the interconnectivity of the world’s fragile ecology, as we reach tipping points from which there may be no return.

The series looks at new climate science and faces the harsh realities of a changing world – collapsing ecosystems, marine die-offs and escalating extreme weather phenomena. But it also explores a positive vision for reimagining economies, landscapes and infrastructure – and practical solutions, ways of mobilising collective resolve, and challenging humanity to become a transformative force, harnessing innovation to safeguard the future of civilisation.

Episode 1, Into the Storm, highlights the immediate and escalating effects of climate change. It opens in Ireland, where extreme weather events are becoming increasingly common. In Greenland, it explores the rapid melting of the ice sheet, with potentially devastating consequences – rising sea levels and disruptions to the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), the main ocean current system in the Atlantic Ocean. It also touches on the effects of climate change in Malawi and Siberia, a grim picture of widespread damage.

Episode 2, Against the Tide, focuses on adaptation strategies. It explores how countries and communities are responding to rising sea levels, increased flooding and more frequent droughts. The Netherlands serves as a case study in proactive adaptation, coming up with innovative solutions in the form of sea barriers and climate-resilient infrastructure. This episode also examines the challenges faced by vulnerable communities in Wales, Bangladesh and Florida.

Episode 3, Decarbonising the Global Economy, addresses the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels. It opens with the world’s dependence on carbon-based energy sources and then explores ways to a cleaner, more sustainable future. It travels to Ukraine, the United States, Sweden, Finland and Florida, presenting a range of approaches to decarbonisation.

Throughout the series, experts from different fields offer insights into the latest climate science and potential solutions. The series aims to challenge viewers to confront the realities of climate change but also to inspire collective action. It emphasises the need for bold policies, innovative technologies and individual responsibility in safeguarding the future of the planet.

A year after tech firm OpenAI roiled Hollywood with the release of its Sora AI video tool, Chief Executive Sam Altman was back — with a potentially groundbreaking update.

Unlike the generic images Sora could initially create, the new program allows users to upload videos of real people and put them into AI-generated environments, complete with sound effects and dialogue.

In one video, a synthetic Michael Jackson takes a selfie video with an image of “Breaking Bad” star Bryan Cranston. In another, a likeness of SpongeBob SquarePants speaks out from behind the White House’s Oval Office desk.

“Excited to launch Sora 2!” Altman wrote on social media platform X on Sept. 30. “Video models have come a long way; this is a tremendous research achievement.”

But the enthusiasm wasn’t shared in Hollywood, where the new AI tools have created a swift backlash. At the core of the dispute is who controls the copyrighted images and likenesses of actors and licensed characters — and how much they should be compensated for their use in AI models.

The Motion Picture Assn. trade group didn’t mince words.

“OpenAI needs to take immediate and decisive action to address this issue,” Chairman Charles Rivkin said in a statement Monday. “Well-established copyright law safeguards the rights of creators and applies here.”

By the end of the week, multiple agencies and unions, including SAG-AFTRA, chimed in with similar statements, marking a rare moment of consensus in Hollywood and putting OpenAI on the defensive.

“We’re engaging directly with studios and rightsholders, listening to feedback, and learning from how people are using Sora 2,” Varun Shetty, OpenAI’s vice president of media partnerships, said in a statement. “Many are creating original videos and excited about interacting with their favorite characters, which we see as an opportunity for rightsholders to connect with fans and share in that creativity.”

For now, the skirmish between well-capitalized OpenAI and the major Hollywood studios and agencies appears to be only just the beginning of a bruising legal fight that could shape the future of AI use in the entertainment business.

“The question is less about if the studios will try to assert themselves, but when and how,” said Anthony Glukhov, senior associate at law firm Ramo, of the clash between Silicon Valley and Hollywood over AI. “They can posture all they want; but at the end of the day, there’s going to be two titans battling it out.”

Before it became the focus of ire in the creative community, OpenAI quietly tried to make inroads into the film and TV business.

The company’s executives went on a charm offensive last year. They reached out to key players in the entertainment industry — including Walt Disney Co. — about potential areas for collaboration and trying to assuage concerns about its technology.

This year, the San Francisco-based AI startup took a more assertive approach.

Before unveiling Sora 2 to the general public, OpenAI executives had conversations with some studios and talent agencies, putting them on notice that they need to explicitly declare which pieces of intellectual property — including licensed characters — were being opted-out of having their likeness depicted on the AI platform, according to two sources familiar with the matter who were not authorized to comment. Actors would be included in Sora 2 unless they opted out, the people said.

OpenAI disputes the claim and says that it was always the company’s intent to give actors and other public figures control over how their likeness is used.

The response was immediate.

Beverly Hills talent agency WME, which represents stars such as Michael B. Jordan and Oprah Winfrey, told OpenAI its actions were unacceptable, and that all of its clients would be opting out.

Creative Artists Agency and United Talent Agency also argued that their clients had the right to control and be compensated for their likenesses.

Studios, including Warner Bros., echoed the point.

“Decades of enforceable copyright law establishes that content owners do not need to ‘opt out’ to prevent infringing uses of their protected IP,” Warner Bros. Discovery said in a statement. “As technology progresses and platforms advance, the traditional principles of copyright protection do not change.”

Unions, including SAG-AFTRA — whose members were already alarmed over the recent appearance of a fake, AI-generated composite named Tilly Norwood — also expressed alarm.

“OpenAI’s decision to honor copyright only through an ‘opt-out’ model threatens the economic foundation of our entire industry and underscores the stakes in the litigation currently working through the courts,” newly elected President Sean Astin and National Executive Director Duncan Crabtree-Ireland said in a statement.

The dispute underscores a clash of two very different cultures. On one side is the brash, Silicon Valley “move fast and break things” ethos, where asking for forgiveness is seen as preferable to asking for permission. On the other is Hollywood’s eternal wariness over the effect of new technology, and its desire to retain control over increasingly valuable intellectual property rights.

“The difficulty, as we’ve seen, is balancing the capabilities with the prior rights owned by other people,” said Rob Rosenberg, a partner with law firm Moses and Singer LLP and a former Showtime Networks general counsel. “That’s what was driving the entire entertainment industry bonkers.”

Amid the outcry, Sam Altman posted on his blog days after the Sora 2 launch that the company would be giving more granular controls to rights holders and is working on a way to compensate them for video generation.

OpenAI said it has guardrails to block the generation of well-known characters and a team of reviewers who are taking down material that doesn’t follow its updated policy. Rights holders can also request removal of content.

The strong pushback from the creative community could be a strategy to force OpenAI into entering licensing agreements for the content they need, legal experts said.

Existing law is clear — a copyright holder has full control over their copyrighted material, said Ray Seilie, entertainment litigator at law firm Kinsella Holley Iser Kump Steinsapir.

“It’s not your job to go around and tell other people to stop using it,” he said. “If they use it, they use it at their own risk.”

Disney, Universal and Warner Bros. Discovery have previously sued AI firms MiniMax and Midjourney, accusing them of copyright infringement.

One challenge is figuring out a way that fairly compensates talent and rights holders. Several people who work within the entertainment industry ecosystem said they don’t believe a flat fee works.

“Bring monetization that is not a one size fits all,” said Dan Neely, chief executive of Chicago-based Vermillio, which works with Hollywood talent and studios and protects how their likenesses and characters are used in AI. “That’s what will move the needle for talent and studios.”

Visiting journalist Nilesh Christopher contributed to this report.

Oct. 10 (UPI) — President Donald Trump is imposing another 100% in tariffs on Chinese goods exported to the United States and will restrict software exports to China.

The new tariffs are in addition to an existing 30% tariff on Chinese goods and would take effect on Nov. 1, and possibly sooner, the president said in a social media post on Friday, according to CBS News.

The United States in November also will place restrictions on “critical software” destined for China.

Trump said he also might cancel a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping due to new Chinese restrictions on rare earth minerals exports.

Trump and Xi are scheduled to meet in South Korea during an international economic conference that starts on Nov. 2, but the U.S. president on Friday said he no longer has a reason to do so.

“Some very strange things are happening in China!” the president said Friday in a post on Truth Social.

“They are becoming very hostile and sending letters to countries throughout the world that they want to impose export controls on each and every element of production having to do with rare earths,” Trump said.

The export restrictions would “clog’ the markets and make life difficult for virtually every country in the world — especially for China,” he added.

The president said representatives of other nations have contacted his administration and are “extremely angry over this trade hostility, which came out of nowhere.”

“There is no way China should be allowed to hold the world ‘captive,'” Trump said.

“But that seems to have been their plan for quite some time, starting with the ‘magnets’ and other elements that they have quietly amassed into somewhat of a monopoly position.”

Pending Chinese rare earth minerals restrictions

China sent letters that are several pages long to other nations and detail every rare earth element that Chinese leaders want to withhold from other countries, Trump said.

China controls most of the world’s rare earth minerals market and announced the new restrictions on Thursday, according to CNBC.

The restrictions announced on Thursday would take effect on Dec. 1 and affect the manufacturing of semiconductors and other technologies that rely on rare earth minerals, such as batteries for electric vehicles.

The Chinese government intends to require companies located outside of China to obtain a license to export their goods that contain rare earth minerals, The New York Times reported.

It also seeks to regulate the refining of rare earth minerals and certain types of technologies used to manufacture batteries.

The Chinese trade restrictions were announced amid efforts to ease trade tensions between the United States and China, which Trump and Jinping were expected to discuss during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference in Seoul, South Korea, in January, Politico reported.

Mutually assured economic disruption

Beijing’s announcement on Thursday could trigger “mutually assured disruption” of the Chinese, U.S. and other global economies, said Craig Singleton, a China fellow for the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

He called China’s move a “miscalculation” and said Trump’s social media post shows China has crossed a line that is likely to cause a trade war.

“Both sides are reaching for their economic weapons at the same time,” Singleton told Politico, “and neither seems willing to back down.”

The Dow Jones Industrial Average reflected the news of the likely trade war on Friday and was down more than 520 points at $45,837.60 as of 2:25 p.m. EDT.

While the Dow is down, China’s pending rare earth minerals trade restrictions have spurred a run on related stocks, CNBC reported.

Rare earth mining firm MP Materials’ share price rose by 15% and USA Rare Earth’s shares by 19 percent during morning trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

USA Rare Earth is a vertically integrated rare earth miner and producer of magnets used in a variety of technologies.

NioCorp Developments’ share price also rose by 14% and Energy Fuels’ by more than 10% during trading late Friday morning.